Well it should be apparent right now that if the Supreme Court of the US does rule against the City of Chicago's gun ban ordinances, the city itself may not want to concede defeat just yet. Almost like how Washington, DC, in light of the SCOTUS ruling last year, did attempt to play around with some ideas to maintain some gun control.

As Chicago awaits a U.S. Supreme Court ruling this month that could overturn its 28-year-old handgun ban, City Hall is considering a host of countermeasures that might set off another round of legal fights with gun advocates.

In an interview with the Tribune, Mayor Richard Daley acknowledged an uphill battle against the gun industry, which he described as the most powerful lobby in the United States. Even so, he vowed that in the event residents are allowed to have handguns at home, the city would take steps to ensure that officials can account for the weapons.

The mayor said his primary goal would be to protect police officers, paramedics and emergency workers from being shot when responding to an incident at a home. He said he also wants to save taxpayers from the financial cost of lawsuits if police shoot someone in the house because the officer felt threatened.

"If the ban is overturned, we will see a lot of common-sense approaches in the city aimed at protecting first responders," Daley said. "We have to have some type of registry. If a first responder goes to an apartment, they need to know if that individual has a gun."

I first got wind of this article via Publius Forum, who cut up the reasons why Daley wants to protect his first responders from the implications of the ruling against Chicago's gun ban:

And I like how Daley's argument against the Constitution has morphed over the last few years. Initially he was claiming to be the protector of the City's children by banning firearms in his realm. He was going to save lives in a city constantly on the list of the highest murder rates in the nation (and that quite despite his decades-old gun banning
efforts). But now that this spin was defeated all of a sudden Daly [sic] is now all worried about his "emergency workers" safety.

Chicago already requires registration of rifles and shotguns, which are legal in the city, and those regulations could easily be applied to handguns, according to the city's corporation counsel, Mara Georges. The city also has the option of rewriting its current ordinance to include stronger, more controversial measures, such as databases that track a gun from the manufacturer to the gun shop to its current owner, and ballistic fingerprinting, which requires manufacturers to test-fire guns and keep a record of the unique ballistic markings left on bullets and shell casings.
...
Daley said he likes all aspects of the D.C. law and that Chicago could look there for ways to strengthen its licensing procedures. After its gun ban was overturned, the district adopted stringent requirements for prospective gun owners, including a four-hour class on firearm safety, at least an hour of firing training and passing an exam. The newly purchased gun also must undergo ballistics identification firing by police.

Next year, the district will require semi-automatic pistols to be micro-stamped, a controversial technique in which serial numbers are marked on cartridge cases that can be traced back to registered gun owners. California also has adopted a requirement for micro-stamping, a technology that was recently developed and is not yet in use. New York's legislature is considering a micro-stamping bill.

What I placed in bold makes a lot of sense to me. If we may have to live with the idea of owning guns as an individual right then perhaps we should be forced to be trained in firearm safety. Too bad that this is the spin of this situation:

Daley, who has made gun control a cornerstone of his administration, said he and other mayors struggle daily with the common philosophy that places too much value on guns and too little emphasis on the consequences of gun ownership.

"What has happened in this nation is we really believe that guns are better than the law to settle things," the mayor said. "We're not talking about hunters and gun collectors, but this whole idea that America should be governed more by guns than by the law. That really disturbs me."

The federal government, Daley said, has abdicated its responsibility of regulating interstate commerce in guns and placed that burden on local governments, without giving them leeway to make decisions based on situations in their own communities.

"It's their responsibility, not ours," Daley said. "Guns come here from other states, and we have to figure out how to respond to it."

He isn't the only one that feels that way. I above all do not want to place the gun above the individual. As a matter of fact, I don't believe the gun is a substitute for settling disputes with the law. Also, no one should argue that we need to have emphasis on the consequences of gun ownership.

The issue is for those who do understand the consequences or the responsibility of firearm ownership. Why should they be forced to abide by a ban because there are those who, for whatever reason, don't understand those consequences?

WHO has ever suggested that, "guns are better than the law to settle things". What NONSENSE! The point is that, frequently, (more often than not), the law isn't THERE to deal with crimes as they occur. AND . . . what good will a list do for the benefit of first responders? The ones who are dangerous are the people who will STILL have ILLEGAL, unregistered guns. Finally, the microstamping idea is insane. Most guns that are used to commit crimes come from out of state, anyway. USELESS! What a crock of bull these people spew!

Register handguns to protect the lives of first responders?...Well, rifles and shotguns are registered, and how is that working out for Chicago?....Canada, for the last 15 years, has had a long gun registry, and it has failed to prevent/solve one crime, or save one life...It was to have cost $2 million, but the cost is now closer to $2 Billion....What a fraud....

As a gun owner I am a big believer in training. In fact, I think it would be a very good idea if firearms safety training were included in high school programs. Emphasis would be on how different firearms operate, rifles, pistols, shotguns, and revolvers, and how to check that they are unloaded, and how to handle them properly. A controversial view perhaps, but one which would reduce accidental shootings I believe.

Criminals will never register or license their firearms. I obey all of the strict gun laws in my state (New York) because I prefer to live my life outside of prison. Criminals, by definition, are willing to violate laws and risk punishment from the state, and therefore will never obey firearms laws any more than the other laws they violate. There are so many guns circulating in the USA that the task of reducing the supply of guns available to criminals is similar to trying to reduce the supply of marijuana to the black market. Practically impossible with the resources and powers that law enforcement can reasonably and legally be endowed with. The overwhelming majority of guns are never used in a crime, and the risk of a gun owner/friend/family member being killed or injured is well below the level generally tolerated by society. Owning a car is quite a bit more dangerous than owning a gun, yet most American adults own cars and ride in them daily. In the USA, out of around 198 million licensed drivers, there are about 40000 accident deaths annually, out of about 192 million privately owned firearms there are around 1100 fatal accidents each year. Gun control advocates are a lot like the anti-vaccine crowd. They have not used a numerical approach when assessing the situation, and have arrived at a conclusion based on fear rather than . I own one rifle, I am not an NRA member and I don't vote based on gun issues, but the reality is that relatively unregulated private gun ownership is not a major threat to our society. Taking a hardline stance against gangs and individuals with violent histories is probably the best approach to preventing violence, certainly much more reasonable than maintaining a large bureaucracy to track guns and their owners.

Daley's weak assertion that first responders must know who has a gun is as ignorant as the stupid thought that crooks will register their guns. H does not care about first responders; he wants to violate the United States Constitution and disarm the peasantry while the powerful remain armed and protected.

I believe that if a government can register and restrict the 2nd Amendment, the can also do the same for the other Amendments. SO, let's license and require testing of all news reporters. Specifically examine them on the entire Constitution with emphasis on the TREASON section.

Let's examine and test everyone who runs for public office the same way.

Let's examine every judge.

You can't pick and choose the sections of the Constitution you want to protect and defend.

That is a great idea. For that matter, let us set a national standard for the police. Let us form a national force to randomly pull over police officers and randomly test them on issues of civil rights and proper proceedure. Let's install GPS devices in their vehicles and match them to emergency calls so we know if they are speeding to get some chicken and donuts or not.

Let's also institute a sworn oath policy for all politicians. They must swear under penalty of perjury that they will only tell the truth. And that they will be held responsible for their campaigns "mistatements" by criminal prosecution. Let's add to that, live lie detectors during Q/A and debates.

Our government seems to think that the citizens are the one who are out of control. From my stand point, it is our government.

Microstamping doesn’t work ..and if they modify the Firing Pins (to compensate for the engraving) and any Cartridge Primers are pierced (look it up) …will the Politicians who signed off on this Law be held responsible for the damage or worse ..people injured ? Who will be Liable / Who will pay the resulting Class Action Lawsuit costs ?
The people pushing this legislation know nothing about Firearms or Ammunition.
They care nothing about the cost (and loss of State jobs) or actual risks involved.
It’s time for the Anti Gun groups to find a new cause to Champion

I think as some commenters have already pointed out, the criminals will clearly not register their guns, so these sorts of measures will never actually help to lessen crime. Seems it's on to a loser before it starts I'm afraid. JasonR

I think as some commenters have already pointed out, the criminals will clearly not register their guns, so these sorts of measures will never actually help to lessen crime. Seems it's on to a loser before it starts I'm afraid. JasonR

Add a Comment

Name*

Email*

Website

Remember?

Please enter the letter y in the field below:

Live Comment Preview

Notes & Tags

Items marked with a * are required fields. Please respect each other. We reserve the right to delete any comments borne out of douchebaggery or that deal in asshattery.

Feature

This is a story of life, love, and property damage. It is a story involving crystallized water, piled some 19 inches deep. The story forces us to confront greed, manipulation, logistics, and physics. The characters include the legendary and the ordinary, from Rahm Emanuel to a bus driver whose name we'll likely never know. More...

Civics

It's not surprising that some of Mayor Emanuel's sympathizers and supporters are confusing people's substantive disputes with the mayor as the effect of poor marketing on his part. It's exactly this insular worldview that has gotten the mayor in hot... More...